Or, as Sal would say "Even Darwinists agree my reasoning on the subject belongs in textbooks."

--------------It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Oh no it's not, it's textbook YEC reasoning. If the world is old the Bible is false and god don't exist.

--------------The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Oh no it's not, it's textbook YEC reasoning. If the world is old the Bible is false and god don't exist.

Well, The world IS old, the bible IS false, and god DON'T exist, so this is all valid reasoning.

--------------"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

It even didn't surprise me when he began cutting out parts of my replies to give the impression I agreed with him, again with no board notice

Now the cocksucker has started editing my posts and replacing my words with his own words praising Sal's work.

Not even AIG, ICR, or UncommonDescent stooped to falsifying posts under a user's name.

I hope everyone disseminates this far and wide, to let the world know what a worthless shitheel that asshole really is.

Apologies for the language, but I'm pretty right now.

--------------"Science is what got us to the humble place weâ€™re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

[admin note: Tiggy's post had some editorial imporvements made to it by the moderators]

The admin note was just added a few minutes ago, after which the post was locked so I can't edit it.

Sal's a classy act for sure

--------------"Science is what got us to the humble place weâ€™re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

C'mon, folks, please remember that before hitting "Submit" for a comment at one of those antievolution advocate-run fora, "Select all" and "Copy" your work. Then bring it here and enter it in the appropriate thread. If you want to really give the admins at those other sites hissy fits, do what I used to do when posting to ISCID, and enter the comment here *first*, then drop in the link to the unedited original in the comment posted there. That way, if they remove the link that shows that they have no tolerance for open discussion, and if they leave it but muck about with your words, it will become obvious what they are up to.

Hey Sal .....JESUS MUST BE SPINNING IN HIS GRAVE.Salvadore Cordova is about as useful as a one-legged man in an arse kicking contest.

--------------The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

To finish my story, Sal the Shithead just deleted all my posts and deleted my account

I'd much rather have that than have the asshole posting stuff in my name.

Gawd, I feel dirty after having to deal with that scumbag. I'm gonna go take a nice hot shower and try to scrub off the stink.

--------------"Science is what got us to the humble place weâ€™re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

Rhetoric is civic discourse. It depends on the willingness to engage the other. Given the passionate commitment of participants in the YEC debate, it's not surprising that passions get engaged.

In this regard, notions of "politeness" can morph very easily, and have already on these forums, into practices of policing that always end up protecting the owners of the forum. The Young Comos "discussion" forums are quickly morphing into a set of manifestly unfair forums -- among the least fair I've ever seen -- where "civility" is used like a cudgel and rhetorically suspect practices (such as changing the words of a poster) are not treated as gross violations of decent practice.

--------------"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

The red line is the super imposed line from the above fabricated points. The redline is where we would expect FABRICATED points to lie (give or take a little going up or down). The Green Line is where we would expect good data to lie. There is of course some temperature issues, but I will visit that in a subsequent post and respond to the supposed exterme error problems and show they objections are insufficient to weaken the plausibility C-14 dating is badly flawed beyond about 1000 years.

There are more details to consider, but the point was to show that FABRICATED ages will result in downward slanting lines.

But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. …

The moderators seem to have taken Tiggy's posts and moved them silently to a location called "the recycle bin." These posts are apparently called "uncivil" because they say that Sal doesn't know what he's talking about with respect to C14 and that Sal's "refutation" of C14 by means of random numbers is "stupid." Apparently such comments are deemed too much for the delicate sensibilities of the moderators. So:

Forums then:

Forums now:

--------------"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

After ignoring my querry [sic] to do a simply calculation, I do the calculations.

Tiggy then offers his unuseful opinion after I make the calculations. Tiggy's posts on my C-14 thera [sic] are subject to the follwoing [sic] rule: If I find them uninformative, they'll end up in the recycle bin.

He can reciprocate on any thread he starts and treat me the same way. He is a co-moderator in that respect. Although, I have no intention of making too many appearances on his threads if any at all.

Offering the opponent a chance at reciprocal moderation abuse is hardly symmetrical behavior. especially when the major dialogue opponent refuses to engage in any forum he does not control.

--------------"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

The red line is the super imposed line from the above fabricated points. The redline is where we would expect FABRICATED points to lie (give or take a little going up or down). The Green Line is where we would expect good data to lie. There is of course some temperature issues, but I will visit that in a subsequent post and respond to the supposed exterme error problems and show they objections are insufficient to weaken the plausibility C-14 dating is badly flawed beyond about 1000 years.

There are more details to consider, but the point was to show that FABRICATED ages will result in downward slanting lines.

But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. …

The colored points on the graph are actual empirical data from peer-reviewed studies. They show that the racemization constant for the amino acid decay in NOT constant but decreases with time.

The equation Sal uses to generate his red line is an approximation that was derived from that empirical data.

OF COURSE if you plug any numbers into it you're going to get the same sloping line SAL YOU FUCKING MORON

The green line that Sal says is the "good" data is what you get if you assume the racemization constant IS actually constant over time. Problem is, both YEC authors that Sal is drawing from acknowledge that is NOT the case

Quote

M Brown: Let's look at the graph below. If Amino Acid dating was a predictable process, like other dating techniques with a predictable rate, the points on the chart would align themselves in a horizontal line. That would indicate that the Racemization constant really is a constant. It would mean that this method would be able to predict an age by itself. It would indicated that the rate would be the same rate for all the samples collected.

This is definitely not the case. Looking at the graph we can see that the Racemization constant changes almost as much as the predicted date!

Quote

RH Brown: The most impressive immediate impact of these plots is that for a particular amino acid there is no characteristic racemization rate constant that can be used to estimate the age of every fossil containing that amino acid. If each amino acid could be described by a characteristic racemization rate constant as a component of fossil protein, the data points in figures (3) and (4) would cluster about a horizontal line. The demonstrated clustering about a line which slopes downward indicates that the apparent racemization rate constant is actually not a constant, but is related to fossil age, diminishing as age increases. This observation has been made frequently in the literature (e.g., Lajoie et al. 1980, Bada and Schroeder 1972, King and Hare 1972, Wehmiller and Hare 1971, Hare and Mitterer 1966).

So not only does Sal not understand C14 dating, he doesn't even understand the YEC articles he is arguing!

--------------"Science is what got us to the humble place weâ€™re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

Oops! Two other posters noticed the rash of deletions, and had the nerve to question the Mighty Sal

Quote

chunk: Hi,If you believe in freedom of expression why are you editing peoples posts and deleting peoples accounts and posts?

/confused

Quote

rrf:Sal quoting from John Stuart Mill

Quote

But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. …

You know, Sal, as you pretend to honor Mill while concurrently editting and deleting the comments of dissenting posters, you would do well to remember Psalm 101:7 which says "No one who practices deceit will dwell in my house; no one whospeaks falsely will stand in my presence."

Sal deleted these from the Board Comments as soon as he saw them, but forgot that they are still visible in the Recycle bin.

Hermagoras' posts (see above) got waxed too.

Looks like Sal has a mini palace revolt on his hands.

--------------"Science is what got us to the humble place weâ€™re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

speaking of ISCID, it doesn't make sense that PCID is defunct. The procedure for submitting papers to PCID is to post them to the ISCID Archive. Then, one of the ISCID creationist honchos approves it and it goes into the next issue. There are a dozen or so submissions since the last issue in Dec 2005. Why let your journal go defunct when you could just bundle those as your next issue? Why let us exult in the fact that Revolutionary New ID Science can't keep a single journal going, when you could just round up these bullshit 'papers' and pretend not to be defunct?

Wes and Steve would never stoop to editting other people's posts because we here at AtBC are not afraid of dissent or discussion. Also because we know we have the facts on our side!

Louis

Edited by stevestory and Wesley R. Elsberry on Aug. 03 2007, 16:24

No it fecking well wasn't. WRE

Yes it fecking well was. SQS

Will the pair of you knock it off? All this editting of posts and reality by supplying overwhelming and uncontrovertable evidence is interfering with my young earth creationism.

This post is purely intended as mockery of Salvador "I love lying, me" Cordova's Iraqi Information Minister-like tendancies when it comes to editting other people's posts. I categorically state, for the record, that neither Wesley R. Elsberry, nor Steve Story have ever editted any other poster's posts to the best of my knowledge. Except this one. Which of course they didn't edit. I should also point out that neither of them is a member of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy. a) Because it doesn't exist and b) because at least 50% of them are not an atheist. Why does my head hurt? I should always remember never to try to duplicate UD style tard on a full stomach.